4.7 Article

Apolipoprotein(a) Isoforms and the Risk of Vascular Disease Systematic Review of 40 Studies Involving 58,000 Participants

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 55, 期 19, 页码 2160-2167

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.10.080

关键词

lipoprotein(a); apolipoprotein(a) isoforms; cardiovascular disease; meta-analysis; epidemiology

资金

  1. Gates Cambridge Trust
  2. UK Medical Research Council
  3. British Heart Foundation
  4. BUPA Foundation
  5. diaDexus
  6. European Union
  7. Evelyn Trust
  8. Fogarty International Center
  9. GlaxoSmithKline
  10. Medical Research Council
  11. Merck Sharp
  12. Dohme
  13. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute
  14. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
  15. Novartis
  16. Roche
  17. UK Biobank
  18. Wellcome Trust
  19. British Heart Foundation [RG/08/014/24067] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives The purpose of this study was to assess the association of apolipoprotein(a) (apo[a]) isoforms with cardiovascular disease risk. Background Although circulating lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is likely to be a causal risk factor in coronary heart disease (CHD), the magnitude of this association is modest. Lipoprotein(a) particles with smaller, rather than larger, apo(a) isoforms may be stronger risk factors. Methods Information was collated from 40 studies published between January 1970 and June 2009 that reported on associations between apo(a) isoforms and risk of CHD or ischemic stroke (involving a total of 11,396 patients and 46,938 controls). Results Thirty-six studies used broadly comparable phenotyping and analytic methods to assess apo(a) isoform size. These studies yielded a combined relative risk for CHD of 2.08 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.67 to 2.58) for individuals with smaller versus larger apo(a) isoforms (corresponding approximately to 22 or fewer kringle IV type 2 repeats vs. >22 repeats or analogously an apo[a] molecular weight of < 640 kDa vs. < 640 kDa). There was substantial heterogeneity among these studies (I-2 = 85%, 80% to 89%), which was mainly explained by differences in the laboratory methods and analytic approaches used. In the 6 studies of ischemic stroke that used comparable phenotypic methods, the combined relative risk was 2.14 (1.85 to 2.97). Overall, however, only 3 studies made allowances for Lp(a) concentration. Conclusions People with smaller apo(a) isoforms have an approximately 2-fold higher risk of CHD or ischemic stroke than those with larger proteins. Further studies are needed to determine whether the impact of smaller apo(a) isoforms is independent from Lp(a) concentration and other risk factors. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:2160-7) (C) 2010 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据